Litigation funding in Belgium: legal efficiency with financial support
In an increasingly complex and costly legal environment, litigation financing is positioned as a practical and strategic solution for those seeking justice without compromising their financial resources. The model allows a third party —such as Loopa— to assume the cost of litigation in exchange for a portion of the favorable outcome. In Belgium, a country with a strong legal tradition and an active legal community, this tool has found a growing space for application, both in arbitrations and in judicial litigations.
History of third party funding in Belgium
Although Belgium was not one of the pioneering countries in the adoption of third party funding, the model has gained visibility in recent years, driven by the globalization of legal services and the increase in complex commercial disputes. Initially, funded cases were concentrated in international arbitration based in Brussels or involving Belgian companies, but gradually local judicial litigation cases also began to benefit from this solution. The growing openness of the Belgian legal sector to alternative financing mechanisms has been key to this development. Top-tier law firms, sophisticated litigants, and companies with high-value claims began to explore more frequently the possibility of having an external funder, not only to reduce their financial exposure but also to independently validate the viability of the case. Today, Belgium is considered a jurisdiction receptive to third party funding, especially in commercial disputes, cases against the State, or asset recovery processes, all contexts where Loopa's support can make a difference.
Legal framework: legal certainty and consistency with continental law
The Belgian legal system, based on civil law, does not contain explicit restrictions on third-party litigation funding. Like in other countries with a continental tradition, funding agreements fall within contractual autonomy and are valid as long as they respect general principles of law. The assignment of litigation rights is possible under Belgian law and is a common tool for structuring agreements between funders and claimants. This assignment can serve as security or as a vehicle to distribute any economic outcome. Additionally, the practice of quota litis agreements (contingent fees) is partially allowed in Belgium, indicating openness to remuneration schemes tied to case success. Belgian legislation, while not specifically regulating third-party funding yet, also does not prohibit or restrict it. Therefore, the current legal framework allows funders like Loopa to operate safely and transparently, always in agreement with the client and their lawyer.
Arbitration Application: Brussels as a Strategic Hub
Belgium, and particularly Brussels, holds a prominent position on the map of international arbitration. The city is home to institutions such as CEPANI (Belgian Centre for Arbitration and Mediation), one of the most active and respected entities in Europe. CEPANI has explicitly supported the presence of third-party funders, as long as the principles of independence, disclosure, and procedural fairness are respected. In this context, third-party funding allows companies and individuals to access arbitration - often perceived as costly - without the need to tie up large amounts of capital. Furthermore, the funding can serve as a signal of the strength of the case, enhancing the negotiating position of the funded party. Loopa is particularly well positioned to facilitate access to arbitration in Brussels and other Belgian cities, offering not only capital but also external validation of the case and a support structure throughout the entire process.
Application in judicial disputes: a tool to monetize the wait
The Belgian judicial system is efficient in comparative terms, but civil proceedings can still drag on for several years, especially in higher instances or complex cases. Additionally, procedural costs can become significant when expert opinions, translations, multiple lawyers, or precautionary measures are involved. In this context, litigation funding is not limited to covering expenses. With Loopa, the plaintiff can monetize their claim in advance, turning an uncertain and future collection expectation into immediate liquidity. This advance of the economic outcome is particularly valuable in cases against the State, civil liability claims, complex executions, or long-lasting commercial litigations. The traditional model, focused on expense reimbursement, is not always sufficient in these scenarios. Loopa proposes a more comprehensive alternative: funding to cover fees, but also to allow the client to have resources today, without waiting for a judgment that may perhaps arrive several years later.
Conclusion: strategic access to justice in Belgium
Belgium positions itself as a mature, reliable jurisdiction compatible with the growth of litigation financing. The strength of its legal system, the openness of its arbitration institutions, and the willingness of its courts to respect private agreements make the country a conducive environment for Loopa to support clients and lawyers in the pursuit of justice. Whether in arbitration, prolonged litigation, or strategic business disputes, third-party funding is consolidating in Belgium as a legitimate, modern tool aligned with the principles of continental law. Loopa contributes to this process by providing capital, experience, and commitment, with a clear mission: that no meritorious case fails to progress due to lack of resources.
